<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (10) TMI 204 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3938</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed as the Tribunal set aside all confiscation orders and penalties. The Tribunal found no direct evidence of substitution of goods and deemed the re-assessment without Revenue appeal impermissible. Emphasizing the finality of the original assessment, the Tribunal invalidated the reduction of the drawback claim and held that penalties cannot stand if the foundational confiscation is invalid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2015 17:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43286" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 204 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3938</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed as the Tribunal set aside all confiscation orders and penalties. The Tribunal found no direct evidence of substitution of goods and deemed the re-assessment without Revenue appeal impermissible. Emphasizing the finality of the original assessment, the Tribunal invalidated the reduction of the drawback claim and held that penalties cannot stand if the foundational confiscation is invalid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>